twiggy2
Well-Known Member
Often when animals are signed over to the care of the vets the animals are then homes through a rescue centre the vets already work with, some go to staff or family of staff.
IME animals are signed over and the bills are then swallowed by the practice, even a large cooperate I worked at did this.
At the end of the day etc are not charities to subsidise pet ownership.
A fold in the intestines is an emergency and requires emergency surgery so if suspected need swift action and time is of the essence so there is no time to allow an owner to source funds.
As others have sadi the OP has stated they had funds but these funds were allocated to a mortgage, I don't judge anyone for how much they want to use their money but a choice was made by the ow er not to use those funds but they are expecting a business to take them on their word that they will pay over time, if the money is there why should the vets wait to be paid whilst a house purchase goes ahead for the person wanting to owe them money?
IME animals are signed over and the bills are then swallowed by the practice, even a large cooperate I worked at did this.
At the end of the day etc are not charities to subsidise pet ownership.
A fold in the intestines is an emergency and requires emergency surgery so if suspected need swift action and time is of the essence so there is no time to allow an owner to source funds.
As others have sadi the OP has stated they had funds but these funds were allocated to a mortgage, I don't judge anyone for how much they want to use their money but a choice was made by the ow er not to use those funds but they are expecting a business to take them on their word that they will pay over time, if the money is there why should the vets wait to be paid whilst a house purchase goes ahead for the person wanting to owe them money?